Thursday, October 29, 2015

Kremlin Views Any Differences with Moscow in the Regions as Separatism

Paul
Goble

Staunton, October 29 – Just as the
Kremlin views any opposition to Russia abroad as a manifestation of “Russophobia,”
so too it now views any expression of differences with Moscow in Russia’s
regions as an expression of separatism and appears likely to bring ever more
charges against those in the regions who are unhappy with the central
government, experts say.

Moscow clearly hopes to intimidate
regional leaders and activists into silence, but charging those who express a
difference of opinion with separatism may have exactly the opposite effect,
leading those possibly subject to such charges to reflect on what it means to
be part of a Russia run in this way and thus to think more seriously about
separatism.

To date, it has brought such charges
against only two people – Rafis Kashapov of the Tatar Social Center who said
Crimean should be returned to Ukraine and now Vladimir Zavarkin, a Karelian
deputy, who said that if Moscow doesn’t listen to the regions, perhaps they
should have referenda on whether to separate from Russia.

At least two other cases
are known to be in the hands of prosecutors, although no specific charges have
been lodged. They concern Darya Plyudova, a political activist in Krasnodar and
Refat Chubarov, the head of the Crimean Tatar Mejlis. Others almost certainly
are being considered at the present time.

The Moscow newspaper’s Anastasiya
Kornya shows just how absurd and overreaching it is. She notes that Zavarkin
did not specifically call for a referendum on secession but said that one might
be necessary “if the Russian Federation does not hear us,” a distinction that
prosecutors have ignored.

The deputy’s lawyer, Dmitry Dinze, points out
that Zavarkin’s comment was not a specific proposal but a figure of speech and
that prosecutors have taken in out of context. He says that the defense will “insists
on psychological and linguistic analysis” in advance of any trial.

That was supposed to
begin on Monday of this week, Kornya reports, but the case had to be continued
because none of the prosecution witnesses showed up.The judges wanted to allow their previous
statements to be admitted as evidence, but Dinze objected and now the case has
been continued.